​Dear City of Sydney team,

We're writing to express our strong support for making the Moore Park Road and Fitzroy Street cycleways permanent (as well as the City's ongoing cycleway delivery program).

While we're nominally a Marrickville-based organisation, many of our members travel to the City for work, study, and leisure. We prefer to travel to the city without driving and firmly believe that Sydney is better when more people choose to leave the car at home more often.

This route is an important link in Sydney's cycling network, connecting the Eastern Suburbs with Central, sports fields, parklands, and the southern CBD. The popup's success is clear, with weekly cycling trips on Moore Park Road tripling from 2021 to 2026.

We strongly support the installation of permanent infrastructure, with concrete separators rather than the current ones which can be displaced and dangerous to ride into, or trip hazards in the dark. Any Klemmfix that must remain should be secured well and reflective.

Note: we also support the Oxford Street East Cycleway, which will complement the Moore Park Road corridor by serving different localities and key destinations. Protected cycleways on both routes are essential to provide safe, accessible and affordable transport options for a growing population. We do not consider this project to be a viable alternative to Oxford Street; both are needed, particularly if events force this cycleway to close (although, we'd prefer it remain open to enable more people to ride to the stadium).

Suggestions for improvement:
Bikes are a space-efficient way to arrive at major events, and closing active transport routes during peak demand works against the City’s own strategic objectives. Therefore, we do not support the closure of the cycleway on event days, as this will make traffic worse and cycling to events more dangerous, and less attractive. We ask the City to:

• Document the closure protocol explicitly in the final REF, defining what triggers a closure, how many days a year are affected, and what official diversion will be provided via road space reallocation.
• Make clear to other agencies that the City does not support closing a cycleway on event days.
• Where closure is sought by Venues NSW or Transport for NSW, require a managed through route as a condition of the City’s agreement.

Please also give consideration to door-zone clearances, as parking appears to be allowable adjacent to the cycleway on weekend and public holiday mornings and evenings. Weekend mornings are among the highest-volume riding periods along this corridor. 

We also encourage you to improve the shared path sections and intersections as part of future projects.

Thank you for the opportunity to provide input. We would welcome the opportunity to discuss our submission with Council staff.

Yours sincerely,

Ellis Bou-Harb
President
Bike Marrickville

​Bike Marrickville has prepared detailed feedback on the proposal by Inner West Council for the forthcoming shared e-bike strategy. This is a short summary of our feedback.

Bike Marrickville strongly supports: (1) shared e-bikes as part of the Inner West's transport system; and (2) the development of this strategy by Inner West Council.

While there are many positives to the roll-out of shared e-bikes in the Inner West, the current situation is not sustainable. The problem with shared e-bikes in the Inner West right now is not e-bikes. The problem is a lack of parking and infrastructure. Parking will be the greatest issue limiting or accelerating successful shared schemes in the Inner West.

Bike Marrickville considers the strategy should particularly address the following parking issues:

1. Council has the power now to deliver low-cost parking infrastructure across the Inner West — we don't need to wait for a future regulatory scheme.
2. The new regulatory scheme will further strengthen Council's ability to require operators to be high-quality and to use parking — but we don't need to wait for regulation.
3. Shared-bike parking infrastructure needs to take account of all users (including cars, pedestrians and other cyclists) — separate parking in no-stopping areas is best.
4. We should get on with providing parking across the LGA now — this doesn't preclude Council also seeking funding from the NSW Government when grant programs are available.
5. Getting parking right can be simple and low-cost, but is needed (along with an associated Council-led communications campaign) to re-build social license and support bicycle use.

The submission also recommends strategic directions and actions regarding: (1) operator restrictions (go-slow / no-go); (2) selection and regulation of operators (max = 3 operators); and (3) future advocacy by Inner West Council to State Government (part of the NSW public transport system).

Bike Marrickville stands ready to support Inner West Council in developing and implementing this strategy.

‘Making shared e-bikes work for the whole Inner West community’

Shared e-bikes present a transformative opportunity for sustainable and equitable transport in the Inner West.

There are, however, key challenges that need to be addressed to maximise the potential of this transport mode. In particular it is critical that we fix parking so that:
• We rebuild the social license for shared e-bikes in the Inner West
• We make it easier and more attractive for users to access this form of transport

The problem with shared e-bikes in the Inner West right now is not e-bikes. The problem is a lack of parking and infrastructure.

We commend Inner West Council for preparing a shared e-bike strategy, and we recommend that it be based on the following principles:
• Effective shared e-bike parking that is widely available and incorporated, by default, in future place-making
• Growth in shared e-bike use, and wider community acceptance, through infrastructure and clear communications
• A high-quality, fair and well-regulated operator model in our local community
• Shared e-bikes as a fully integrated part of the Inner West's public transport network

To support these principles we recommend that Inner West Council prioritise the following actions in the Strategy:
• Immediate provision by Council of clearly sign-posted, high-quality parking in locations across the Inner West LGA
• Long-term communications campaign in the Inner West to explain the role of e-bike sharing and community expectations for parking and use
• Acceleration of separated cycleways throughout the Inner West in recognition of increased cycling rates due to shared e-bikes
• Limit the number of go-slow areas in the Inner West, and do not have any no-go areas
• Carefully select three (or fewer) operators to ensure the quality of shared e-bikes in our community, and apply operator authorisation conditions targeted at our community's key areas of concern
• Advocacy to the NSW Government for shared e-bikes to move to being an integrated part of Sydney's public transport system

As the NSW Government extends powers to local councils to regulate share-scheme parking, this strategy is an opportunity for Inner West Council to work with the community on how this will occur in the Inner West (and to position the Inner West to access infrastructure grants related to the exercise of those powers).

Bike Marrickville stands ready to work closely with Inner West Council on this opportunity.

Currently there are thousands of shared e-bikes deployed across all parts of the Inner West, with a constant stream of riders using them to get to work or study, do their shopping, explore a new part of the city, or as part of their daily commute. As anyone who has visited Sydenham station in the AM or PM peak knows, shared e-bikes are now a very popular part of our transport network — thousands of commuters each day are now using shared e-bikes as part of their Inner West transport journey. This strategy needs to work for these people.

The present approach to shared e-bikes is, however, impacting the wider community too, because of the lack of a coordinated approach to parking. Negative sentiment towards shared e-bikes is understandably growing because of the 'messiness' and other challenges that they have brought to our public domain. There are very few dedicated parking spaces, it is not obvious to users where they can find a bike or park it after use, bikes fall over too easily, bikes block footpaths, and it's not obvious how the community can fix issues they don't like.

The strategy needs to work for the whole community — not just shared-bike users, but also the wider community, whose social license the success of shared bikes in the Inner West Council area depends on.

​About Bike Marrickville​Bike Marrickville is a volunteer-run not-for-profit group of local residents promoting cycling and improving the local environment.

Bike Marrickville advocates for everyone who rides or would like to ride a bike in and around the former local government area of Marrickville in Sydney's Inner West.

Bike Marrickville members attend Inner West's Local Transport Forum meetings, and other site visits and consultations.

Ensuring the effective integration of shared e-bikes into the Inner West community, as an effective part of our transport network, is a key priority of Bike Marrickville.

Bike Marrickville is excited by the opportunity that shared e-bikes present to significantly increase active transport use in the Inner West.

Already Sydney is reportedly now one of the top three cities in the world for shared e-bike usage, with almost 3 million trips in Greater Sydney in the first six months of 2025. And within Sydney, the Inner West is one of the key locations where those trips occur. Bicycle NSW report that almost 20% of people in Sydney now use shared e-bikes, with uptake surging among Gen Zs where nearly one-third ride e-bikes regularly (32%). [1]

60% of trips in the Inner West are shorter than 5km and a quarter of those could be carried out by walking, using public transport, or cycling. A key barrier to people cycling, however, is affordable access to a suitable bicycle. Shared e-bikes have the potential to fill this gap.

Other key potential economic, social and environmental benefits of shared e-bikes include:

• Like car sharing (e.g. GoGet), there is no need for ownership, addressing transport disadvantage (e.g. enabling households to own one less car and reduce their transport costs).
• Dealing with the 'last mile' in the transport journey — extending the reach and effectiveness of our public transport system.
• Replacing private trips and reducing private vehicle usage — making limited road space less congested and more available for critical uses including public transport and commercial carriage.
• Enabling more trips in the Inner West to be undertaken with lower transport emissions.
• Providing new social and recreational opportunities for the community — cycling, including on e-bikes, has clearly quantified societal health and wellbeing benefits. [2]

The current state-of-play with shared e-bikes is both unusual and unsustainable. Shared e-bikes operate in a shared road environment (footpath and carriageway). This means shared space allocation needs to be considered carefully and deliberately (including, particularly, in relation to parking). Managing these issues is important for the current and future acceptance and success of shared schemes and the social licence they hold with the hosting community.

Due to current regulatory settings, private companies have entered the market and are providing shared e-bike services with very limited oversight. This is not how public transport services are typically delivered, where the government ordinarily takes a lead role in planning, procuring, and subsidising services to ensure they are well integrated, equitable, and reliably delivered. The current issues with shared e-bikes — particularly with bike parking and infrastructure — speak to this current 'laissez-faire' approach and the absence of powers and support, particularly for local government.

We think this evidence of demand and 'proof of concept' presents a strong case for council and government to now take a much more active and deliberate role — through procurement, subsidy, integration with the wider transport network, and parking infrastructure — so that the benefits of shared e-bikes can be secured more consistently and fairly.

In this context, the work of Inner West Council in preparing this strategy is commended. As the NSW Government extends powers to local councils to regulate share-scheme operators, this strategy can help guide the Council's approach and ensure the Inner West is a leader in balancing the competing considerations associated with this important issue. The Strategy can also play an important role in supporting Inner West Council to access forthcoming parking infrastructure funding that the NSW Government has indicated will shortly be made available.

Bike Marrickville strongly supports appropriately regulated and managed shared e-bike schemes. We think this will help ensure shared e-bikes:

• Are seen as a legitimate transport mode that is not in conflict with other forms of active transport (e.g. pedestrians);
• Are complementary to the needs of other forms of cycling and their infrastructure needs (e.g. parking);
• Contribute positively to urban design and the public domain and are easily incorporated into future planning for the Inner West; and
• Play an important role in mode shift — reduced car dependence for shorter journeys, increased public transport use for longer trips, improved transport efficiency overall.

The following principles are suggested to guide the growth of shared e-bikes in the Inner West:

1. Effective shared e-bike parking, widely available and incorporated by default in future place-makingThe Inner West has the opportunity to be a global leader in how shared e-bikes are integrated into dense urban environments. With a modest investment the Inner West can deliver the clarity and order of docked bike-share systems without requiring fixed docking stations. The policy goal should be to capture the benefits of docked systems — predictable, well-defined parking that protects footpaths and public space — through clearly marked, consistently provided parking locations for shared e-bikes. Except in particularly high-density, high-activity areas with very high levels of formal parking provision for shared e-bikes, app-based parking restrictions should not apply to users. Shared e-bike parking should also automatically be included in new public areas (whether provided by Council or by the private sector as a condition of development approval).

2. Growth in shared e-bike use, and wider community acceptance, through infrastructure and clear communicationsExpansion of shared e-bikes should be matched by accelerated delivery of separated cycling infrastructure and sustained community education by Council on use and parking of shared e-bikes. Communications should set clear expectations for responsible use, reinforce cycling as a safe, normal, and efficient transport choice, and provide clear guidance on parking. Council should accelerate its existing active transport infrastructure program to pre-empt the uptake in cycling that will be caused by a high-quality shared e-bike program.

3. A high-quality, fair and well-regulated operator model in our local communityOperators should be selected based on their ability to deliver fleet quality, pricing transparency, safety, and equitable distribution across the Inner West. Council should work with State Government to ensure that appropriate regulatory controls are in place while ensuring these do not disincentivise shared e-bike use, or render shared e-bike schemes economically unsustainable.

4. Shared e-bikes need to be made a fully integrated part of the Inner West's public transport networkShared e-bikes should be recognised as part of the core transport network alongside walking, buses, trains and light rail. Council should work with State Government to support long-term integration, including fare and incentive alignment, to enable seamless multimodal travel and maximise uptake as a legitimate everyday transport option.

Bike Marrickville commends Inner West Council on preparing a strategy for shared e-bikes in the Inner West. It is recommended that the following actions be included in the forthcoming strategy.

Action: Immediate provision of a network of high-quality parking for shared e-bikes across the Inner West LGA
The Inner West can proceed with delivering a high-quality shared e-bike parking network immediately, without waiting for regulatory reform.

Regulation is only relevant in locations where parking is formally limited to designated areas; however, strong outcomes can still be achieved even where no parking restrictions exist, provided high-quality infrastructure is in place. Most users are seeking to do the right thing, and when clear, convenient and visible parking options are provided, they will naturally align their behaviour with those facilities. This is fundamentally an infrastructure and design task that can be implemented within existing powers and road management frameworks.

Apps should only restrict parking locations where sufficient formalised shared e-bike parking is availableBike Marrickville's position is that there should be limited app-based restrictions on e-bike parking, except in high-activity / high-density areas where demand and pedestrian volumes require more structured management. Shared e-bikes provide a unique opportunity for people to have ready access to a high-quality bicycle close to their home or work — to achieve this, bikes need to either be 'free-floating' or available at very regular intervals.

Where parking is proposed to be restricted, we recommend that this only occurs in high-activity areas where a sufficiently dense network of parking corrals is put in place (with initial temporary locations until permanent corral infrastructure can be delivered). Bike Marrickville recommends that parking should only be restricted when an approved parking location is available every 100 metres — so that riders always have a clear, nearby place to end trips, and parking behaviour is naturally guided into predictable patterns.

Shared e-bike parking should be located on-street where possibleBike Marrickville recommends that Inner West Council adopt an approach of prioritising on-street shared e-bike parking where possible. The area's high population density, high rates of walking and — in many locations — historically narrow footpaths put our footpaths and other pedestrian areas at a premium.

It is recommended that this priority for non-footpath locations be embedded in Council's strategy, with on-road locations progressed under the new local road decision-making delegation where possible (i.e. notified to the Local Transport Forum following installation).

Bike Marrickville therefore strongly supports the suggestion in the 'Bike and micromobility device parking guidance (draft)' from Transport for NSW that shared e-bike parking can be located at the approach or departure side of non-signalised intersections (in areas otherwise signposted as 'no stopping'). Locating shared e-bike parking in these locations will provide ready access to shared e-bikes for our community, while minimising the impact on parking for other road users.

Transport for NSW outline (at p14):

"Under NSW Road Rule 170(3), motor vehicles must not stop within 10 metres from the nearest point of an intersecting road at an intersection without traffic lights (unless permitted by regulatory signage). This protects sight lines between vehicles and between vehicles and pedestrians. It is common practice to signpost 10 metres in urban areas. Replacing some of this length of No Stopping with bike parking at carriageway level may be feasible, subject to a road safety assessment to ensure removal does not impede safety. This may be used to deter illegal parking near intersections, provided that sign distances are maintained, regulatory signage is updated as required by the road rules and safety is not compromised."

Bike Marrickville notes that prioritising on-street parking also reflects current NSW Road Rules that restrict adults from riding bicycles on footpaths.

An example of how this may operate, in the narrow, high-density streets west of Australia Street, is shown in Figure 2 below, and adjacent to the Wilson Street cycleway in Figure 3 (located in City of Sydney LGA but heavily used by Inner West residents).

Parking corrals are placed in existing no-stopping areas on the approach side of each intersection. Placing corrals in this location would avoid the need to reallocate existing car parking but would transform parking accessibility for shared e-bikes and reduce the number of shared bikes being parked on the narrow footpaths of Denison, Chelmsford, Albermarle streets etc.

The cover image is a rendering of how one of the parking spots in Figure 1 (on the entrance side of the Probert St / Albermarle St intersection, Newtown) may appear.

​Shared e-bike parking infrastructure should reflect the design quality of overseas 'docked bike parking' but be simpler and lower costThe Inner West can be a global leader by delivering the clarity and order of docked bike-share systems (e.g. Paris Vélib' or Santander Bikes in London — see Figure 4) without requiring the cost or complexity of fixed docking stations. Docked bike schemes have been explored in Sydney and Melbourne before, but the cost of these systems (including, particularly, the docking systems) has been prohibitive. Shared e-bikes provide a chance to get the aesthetic and operational benefits of a docking system (like London has) without the cost or complexity. Shared e-bikes do not require expensive docking infrastructure — but may still benefit from some physical parking support to make sure they are neatly parked and don't fall over.

​We also need to recognise, however, one of the shared scheme's underlying principles and benefits: relatively 'location-flexible' end-to-end journeys. We don't need to end up with only 10 parking bays across the entire LGA; we need a multiplicity of low-cost parking bays (that can be more easily accommodated on-street).

Bike Marrickville recommends that Inner West Council develop a consistent network of simple, purpose-built infrastructure — including wheel stops, bike stands, and clearly marked parking bays — that create obvious, intuitive "homes" for shared e-bikes in the public realm. Where possible it is recommended that shared e-bike parking corrals consist of the three components shown in Figure 5:

​Shared e-bike parking should be separate from, and in addition to, but nearby to, private bicycle parking — to help cyclists 'do the right thing'It is recommended that shared e-bike parking is located close to, but separate from, other bike parking. The western side of Sydenham station provides a good example of this, where both parking options are clear. The needs of shared e-bike parking are different from private bicycle parking (i.e. private bikes need a hoop to lock to, whereas shared e-bikes do not), and it is important that parking suitable for private bicycles is not misused by shared e-bikes.

Ensuring shared e-bikes are provided for when the Inner West public domain is enhancedAs we develop a comprehensive approach to shared e-bike parking in the Inner West, this should also encompass how shared e-bike parking is provided in new development. This includes both new public spaces delivered by Council (e.g. libraries, town squares, refreshed parks) and publicly accessible areas delivered by the private sector (e.g. streetscape improvements as part of residential development).

Council's policies should formally provide that when the Inner West public domain is changed, shared e-bike parking must be considered and — where possible — provided for. In the case of private sector developments this should be recognised in planning conditions. Ensuring that shared e-bikes are explicitly considered and provided for when delivering new public space in the Inner West will have a direct community benefit.

​Inner West Council should immediately start delivering low-cost shared e-bike parking across the local government area rather than waiting for NSW Government fundingThe NSW Government has indicated that it will be considering further infrastructure funding to support shared e-bike parking. Bike Marrickville stands ready to support Inner West Council in applications to access this funding. Given the scale and importance of this issue, however, it is imperative that Inner West Council does not wait for NSW Government funding to deliver parking. It is recommended that Inner West Council immediately progress the development and delivery of shared e-bike parking across the Inner West, with delivery to be further supported by the NSW Government once available.

There is an urgent need for shared e-bike parking to be prioritised in the Inner West — for the benefit of the whole community, including riders. By immediately prioritising the accelerated and widespread delivery by Council in 2026 of low-cost shared e-bike parking, there is an opportunity to respond to community concerns, boost the social license of shared e-bikes in our community, and make it easier and safer for walkers and cyclists in our community to get around.

Managing major demand for parking at key locations during key periods (e.g. AM peak)We already see the demand on shared e-bike parking during key travel periods in the Inner West. For example, the designated shared e-bike parking in the western forecourt of Sydenham station often has in excess of 20 shared e-bikes parked following the AM peak.

If parking restrictions are put in place, this might limit the capacity of users to park if there is not space in the designated parking area. This can be a significant problem for users, especially if alternative parking is not obvious.

To mitigate this risk, Bike Marrickville suggests that Inner West Council work with Transport for NSW and the operators to ensure:
• Real-time app information for shared e-bike users on available parking locations (taking into account all brands of bikes parked) — this should be possible with the standardised data-sharing requirements that Transport is imposing;
• Larger parking facilities at known or expected hot spots (e.g. train stations, shopping malls, supermarkets, cinemas, parks) are identified in Council's strategy and delivered urgently — the Sydenham station example shows the benefit of having a large dedicated area;
• A large number of dispersed nearby parking spots — ideally each corral would have at least three spots, to increase parking availability in the surrounding areas;
• Temporary event parking facilities (supplied in conjunction with Bike Valet) — a dedicated signposted area for an unlimited number of share bikes to be parked;
• Potential for regular bike rebalancing from 'tidal locations' (by operators, Council or Transport) — currently a feature with Vélib, CitiBike and Santander bikes.

It is recommended that Council's monitoring and evaluation plan for shared e-bikes in the Inner West include analysis of the user parking experience and ensuring the "argh, I can't find a park" effect is minimised. It might also be possible for Council and operators to trial innovative responses in the Inner West on this issue. Bike Marrickville would support this too.

Action: Communications campaign in the Inner West to explain the role of e-bike sharing and community expectations for parking and use
It is critical that we clearly communicate to our community how shared e-bike systems work in the Inner West. As a new form of transport, they require a shared understanding of both their benefits and the practical expectations for their use in public space.

This communications campaign has three goals. The first is to build positive community sentiment that shared e-bikes are a legitimate, accessible and useful way to get around. They should be seen as part of the everyday transport mix, alongside walking and public transport, and actively encouraged as an option for a wide cross-section of the community.

The second is to support riders in understanding what "good use" looks like in practice, particularly when it comes to parking. Clear guidance is needed on where bikes should be left, with the preference being clearly designated infrastructure where available. In areas without dedicated facilities, riders should still be supported to make good decisions about safe and considerate parking — including avoiding footpath obstruction, positioning bikes parallel to the kerb where appropriate, and ensuring they do not create hazards or block pedestrian movement.

The third goal is to provide community education for non-riders about how to interact with shared e-bikes in public space. This includes discouraging inappropriate actions such as moving bikes onto footpaths where they obstruct access, or putting trash in the basket of parked bikes. It also includes publicising clear pathways for reporting issues, given that all bikes are identifiable and linked to operators, as well as simple guidance on how communities can request additional parking infrastructure in high-demand locations.

This is a new transport system, and it is reasonable to expect that it requires an accompanying period of education and norm-setting. This is consistent with the introduction of other major public systems and technologies — such as EFTPOS, seatbelts, or public transport smartcards — where clear communication and behaviour guidance were essential to successful adoption and community acceptance.

Action: Acceleration of separated cycleways throughout the Inner West in recognition of increased cycling rates due to shared e-bikes
There is a direct relationship between increased shared e-bike use and the acceleration of separated cycleways and other infrastructure in the Inner West.

Not only will improved infrastructure increase the rates of cycling (including shared e-bike usage), but the additional cyclists in our community due to shared e-bikes will increase the business case (Figure 7) and need for high-quality cycling infrastructure in our community.

Bike Marrickville commends Inner West Council for its recent work in planning for future cycling infrastructure. It is recommended that the delivery of this infrastructure be accelerated as part of the shared e-bike strategy.

To assist Council, Bike Marrickville provided an extensive submission to the 'Building our Community' process in February 2026 identifying priorities for cycling infrastructure investment in the Inner West Council area. These were:

Priority cycleway projects for design and construction (funded via the developer contributions plan):
• Marrickville Rd East Cycleway
• Lilyfield Rd Cycleway
• Iron Cove Creek Masterplan delivery
• Pyrmont Bridge Rd Cycleway
• Robert St, Rozelle Cycleway
• Sydenham Road Strategy & Cycleway

Priority cycleway and quietway projects to support housing uplift:
• Addison Road Cycleway, Marrickville
• Beach & Pine Street Cycleway, Dulwich Hill
• Sydney Steel Road & Edinburgh Rd Cycleway, Marrickville
• Hercules Street Cycleway, Dulwich Hill
• Loftus Street Quietway, Ashfield
• Bland Street Quietway, Ashfield
• Livingstone Street Cycleway southern extension
• Johnston Street Cycleway, Annandale
• Mallet St, Booth/Moore St, Allen St Cycleway in Leichhardt / Annandale / Camperdown

Support for the following other campaigns that would improve cycling in the Inner West:
• A new Marrickville Town Square at the corner of Calvert Street and Illawarra Road.
• Pocket parks / road closures on Illawarra Road, between Marrickville Rd and Sydenham Rd, and another between Sydenham Rd and Addison Rd.
• Cooks River path lighting, widening, and separation of pedestrians and cyclists. Plus connections to the path, and collaboration with other councils along the route to ensure consistency in infrastructure styles delivered.
• Delivery of the Iron Cove Creek path.
• Balmain Road cycleway, in front of Callan Park.

A full copy of our submission is available on this website.

Action: Limit the number of go-slow areas for shared e-bikes, and do not have any no-go areas in the Inner West
Bike Marrickville is concerned about the potential for no-go or go-slow areas to reduce the utility and attractiveness of shared e-bike schemes as a potential alternative sustainable form of transport. Experience in other cities is that large go-slow areas can significantly reduce uptake of cycling, reducing the role of shared e-bikes in supporting sustainable transport.

Bike Marrickville recommends that go-slow areas should only be put in place:

• In areas where cars are prohibited from travel;
• Where there is high-quality cycling infrastructure (either 'pop-up' or 'permanent') in place to support connected journeys through the area;
• Where the 'go-slow area' is not adjacent to a general traffic area where bikes may inadvertently (due to GPS drift) be slowed down, resulting in an unsafe speed differential between cars and bikes;
• Following consultation with the Local Transport Forum, including the Inner West Bicycle Coalition;
• On a fixed-term basis with a review of the go-slow requirement at least annually.

Go-slow areas should be supported by clear visual cues for cyclists, including indications of alternative safe and efficient routes.

Bike Marrickville does not support the use of no-go areas in the Inner West LGA. International experience suggests that no-go zones can be highly controversial and undermine policies intended to improve public spaces and boost rates of walking and cycling. [3] Where there are concerns about bicycle movements in an area, Bike Marrickville considers these should be addressed through go-slow areas (subject to the considerations above), communications campaigns, and alternative safe / efficient infrastructure.

Action: Carefully select a limited number of operators to ensure the quality of shared e-bikes in our community, and apply operator authorisation conditions on issues of key concern for the Inner West community
Bike Marrickville understands that under the new NSW regulatory model for shared e-bikes, Inner West Council will be responsible for granting operating authorisations to approved operators before they can deploy devices within the Inner West Council area. These operating authorisations can include conditions imposed by Inner West Council. [4]

Bike Marrickville understands that the Council is currently in consultation with the NSW Government about how this authorisation process will occur and the matters that Council will be able to regulate.

Recommend no more than three operators in the Inner WestBike Marrickville recommends that, to the extent possible, Council should seek to limit the number of operators to no more than three.

This number will allow some healthy competition and innovation, while still providing a manageable group of operators for Council, Bike Marrickville and other stakeholders to work with.

An excessive number of operators will make it difficult for users to experience a consistently high-quality shared e-bike experience, and for shared e-bikes to have a social license with the wider community.

Inner West Council should have clear community-focussed selection criteria and authorisation conditionsIn selecting operators for the Inner West LGA, Bike Marrickville recommends that Council include consideration of the matters below. Any commitments made by operators in relation to these selection criteria (e.g. fleet mix; pricing; availability etc.) can then be reflected in authorisation conditions imposed by Inner West Council.

​Bike Marrickville notes that a balance will need to be found between ensuring the operator models and conditions in the Inner West respond to the concerns of the community and Council, while also creating an environment that encourages positive innovation and allows operators to provide cost-effective services to our community. Particularly in the current economic climate, ensuring that regulation is not unnecessarily burdensome and does not significantly increase the cost of shared e-bike services in our community will also be important.

Bike Marrickville would be happy to work with Inner West Council to refine the approach taken to selecting operators, and negotiating operator authorisation conditions. Bike Marrickville would also be willing to be a formal part of this selection and authorisation process if that would assist Council.

Action: Advocacy to the NSW Government for shared e-bikes to operate as an integrated part of Sydney's public transport system
Bike Marrickville recognises the extensive time and effort that Inner West Council, and other councils in the Greater Sydney area, have already invested in engaging with the NSW Government on this critical active transport issue.

Although significant progress has been made in establishing a regulatory regime for shared e-bikes in NSW (including the Inner West), Bike Marrickville recommends that continued advocacy and engagement on reform also continue to be a key action in Council's shared e-bike strategy.

In the short term, Bike Marrickville appreciates that Council's advocacy and engagement will likely be focussed on working with Transport for NSW, the operators and other stakeholders to implement the Road Transport (General) Amendment (Micromobility Shared Arrangements) Regulation 2026 and transition to shared e-bike schemes operating under that regulation (and associated legislation).

Bike Marrickville is also confident that Council will continue its effective efforts to partner with the NSW Government to grow and improve the cycling infrastructure in the Inner West. As recent successes have shown — including the GreenWay and Sydenham shared e-bike parking — there is immense untapped demand for high-quality cycling infrastructure delivered in partnership between the NSW Government and Council. As outlined above, shared e-bikes present both a need and an opportunity for this co-delivery to be accelerated.

Bike Marrickville has also identified a third area of advocacy where we believe Inner West Council should seek to partner with the NSW Government on reform: genuinely integrating shared e-bikes with NSW public transport. If experiences to date can be seen as a 'trial' or 'pilot' of the technology, and if near-term improvements are made to overcome initial 'teething' issues (e.g. parking), then in the medium term we encourage Inner West Council to advocate to the NSW Government for e-bike sharing to fundamentally become part of Sydney's public transport.

Genuine integration of e-bike sharing in Sydney's public transport could mean a few things. This could include:

1. Applying an Opal Transfer Discount when moving between shared e-bikes and other public transport modes
   The current Opal transfer discount automatically deducts $2.00 for Adults (or $1.00 for Child/Youth, Concession, and Gold Senior/Pensioner fares) when you switch between metro/train, ferry, bus, or light rail within 60 minutes of your last tap-off, combining those trips into a single continuous journey. Shared e-bike use should be added to this discount regime.
2. Enabling the booking of shared e-bikes through the Next Generation Opal App
   Shared e-bike users currently have to download and operate different apps to use different companies' bicycles. There is no uniform experience for users — or for the wider community (who might use the apps to contact operators about issues with bike parking etc.). It is also not possible for users to see all the bike options in a local area, or how a trip option might include a shared e-bike ride in a user's journey.
   Integrating shared e-bikes into the NSW Government's travel app (currently Opal Travel) would overcome this issue, and make it easier for the community to engage with shared e-bikes as part of the transport network.
3. Uniform branding of shared e-bikes as part of a NSW Government public transport offering
   One of the complaints about shared e-bikes is that they are privately branded objects being left in the public domain. It is understandable that companies like to differentiate their products — including so that users can easily identify which company owns a bike (and hence which app to use).
   It doesn't, however, need to be this way — as we know with Sydney's buses, which since 2010 have transitioned to a uniform Transport for NSW design regardless of the private operator. A similar move in Sydney (e.g. common branding as Opal Bikes) would make the bikes a more consistent, credible part of the public domain and the transport system — and would avoid the risk of gaudy or unattractive designs.
4. Subsidising shared e-bike travel on a consistent basis with subsidies provided to other public transport modes (and toll discounts)
   Under current and proposed regulation, shared e-bike rides are not subsidised by the NSW Government. This is despite the significant wider public benefit realised when community members use shared e-bikes instead of driving, or take up capacity on buses, trains or other public transport. There is also a significant — and well-recognised — wider societal benefit from cycling that shared e-bike journeys generate. [5]
   Often shared e-bikes are compared to ride-sharing companies or taxis, with the question that if there is no subsidy for those services, why would the government subsidise shared e-bikes? Bike Marrickville's position is that a fairer analogy would be for shared e-bikes to be compared to bus, ferry or Metro passengers — taking cars off the road, and using a public and sustainable service to move around the city.
   The fact that shared e-bikes (like most bus, ferry and Metro services) are currently privately delivered should not preclude shared e-bike users from receiving an appropriate government subsidy for each ride (in addition to the Opal Transfer Discount). As with those services, a fair subsidy (and overall fee structure) could be determined by the NSW Government with advice from the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal.
   ​It is recommended that Inner West Council include this subsidy reform in future government advocacy — both in active-transport-specific advocacy, and in more general pre-budget submissions etc.

Action: Clear monitoring and evaluation plan for shared e-bikes in the Inner West
Bike Marrickville recommends that the strategy include a commitment to ongoing monitoring and evaluation of shared e-bikes in the Inner West against agreed metrics. Monitoring and evaluation will help ensure that the opportunity presented by this transport mode is maximised, that Council and Government resources are used efficiently, and that emerging issues are identified quickly and effectively managed.

Appropriate areas of measurement might include:

Bike Marrickville congratulates Inner West Council for its leadership and work in this area. Shared e-bikes are already reshaping how people move around the Inner West, delivering clear benefits for sustainability, access, and local vibrancy.

However, the system is currently constrained by inconsistent parking, fragmented regulation, and uneven public acceptance. Bike Marrickville recommends Council adopt a strategy centred on:

• Delivering a comprehensive parking network;
• Supporting community education;
• Accelerating cycling infrastructure; and
• Advocating for stronger integration of shared e-bikes into Sydney's transport system.

By acting now, Council can address legitimate community concerns while preserving and expanding the significant public benefits that shared e-bikes both already provide and can increasingly offer in the future.

Endnotes

[1] Committee for Sydney and Bicycle NSW, 'Why we can't hit the brakes for e-bikes on trains' (August 2025). https://bicyclensw.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/250821-Committee-for-Sydney-and-Bicycle-NSW-submission.pdf
[2] Anderson CC, Clarkson DE, Howie VA, Withyman CJ, Vandelanotte C. 'Health and well-being benefits of e-bike commuting for inactive, overweight people living in regional Australia.' Health Promot J Austr. 2022 Oct;33 Suppl 1:349-357. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9790588/
[3] See, for example, the ongoing debate in Brussels about a proposed no-go zone in the city centre: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/dec/20/brussels-bike-ban-plan-for-pedestrian-zone-dangerous-and-absurd
[4] Pursuant to Road Transport Act 2013 s148ZZA.
[5] Anderson CC, Clarkson DE, Howie VA, Withyman CJ, Vandelanotte C. 'Health and well-being benefits of e-bike commuting for inactive, overweight people living in regional Australia.' Health Promot J Austr. 2022 Oct;33 Suppl 1:349-357. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9790588/

We welcome these documents and commend Council for taking a more strategic and holistic approach to parking than has been the case to date. We are broadly supportive of the direction. Our comments are intended to help improve the strategy and ensure it delivers on the vision that Council's own transport documents have already established. 
Our submission will make some general comments about the strategy, before providing specific suggestions to the text of the document that we believe will address our comments.
As always, we welcome the opportunity to discuss this submission in person and thank you for the opportunity to provide feedback.

Parking is subsidised storage of private property on public landThere are financial and environmental costs to overproviding parking. Kerbside car parking is a subsidy from the entire community to private vehicle owners. Every square metre devoted to storing a car is space that cannot be used for cycling infrastructure, tree planting, outdoor dining, or accessible footpaths.

Re-allocating parking for greater community benefits is goodThe words “subject to a parking study” suggests improvements are predicated on not losing parking. Instead we should be weighing the various pros and cons fairly and equally – a genuine community benefit (above all other uses) for parking should be established if parking is to be retained, relocated or increased.

Mode shift and cycling are inseparable from parkingThe strategy does acknowledge that alternatives to driving are needed to lower car ownership and use. We believe that the connection between the stick (constraining parking) and the carrot (safe, pleasant cycleways, comfortable bus stops, pleasant footpaths etc.) of mode shift should be explicitly expressed. 

• Revenue from parking schemes should fund active transport improvements
• Active transport should be a key consideration in any parking study or needs assessment as a demand reduction mechanism
• Walking, cycling and public transport should prioritised in street works

Parking can be traffic calmingOn local streets, parking can be used to make the street safer for cycling:

• Alternate side, rear to kerb or angled parking can be used to make chicanes which lower vehicle speeds
• Modal filters can add a few extra parking spaces while reducing through traffic
• Rear to kerb and angled parking increases parking while narrowing travel lanes and lowering vehicles speeds

Parking permit reform should not entrench car ownershipPermit schemes are a demand management technique and not a replacement for demand reduction. In addition, permit scarcity should be seen as a feature, not a bug, of permit schemes – it reflects the reality that kerbside space is limited, valuable and owned collectively by the community, not individuals.

Removing parking minimums is goodThe proposed removal of parking minimums in new apartment buildings is long overdue. Decoupling car parking from home ownership is an incredibly important part of this.
Forcing apartment buyers to buy parking they may or may not need increases the cost of housing and obfuscates the cost of car ownership. 
Decoupling parking lowers the friction to change vehicle needs as parking can be bought or sold without having to move homes. 
Decoupling parking also allows greater flexibility for apartment buyers – some studio apartment owners may want a car space, while some two bedroom owners may want none. This choice is a great feature.

Boats, trailers and long term storageThese items are the lowest priority for the use of public land. They should be priced at least as much as a private car, if not banned outright.
Many boats or trailers being stored long term should indicate a parking provision excess and better use of that space should be investigated.

Below are some specific text changes we would like to see to address our comments above
Introduction, page 6: Replace
This repurposing should be subject to a parking study to investigate whether new parking can be created in alternative locations to offset some or all of the loss.
With
In addition to this repurposing, a parking study to investigate whether new parking can be created in alternative locations can be done if a genuine need for parking exists.

Predicating community improvements on the replacement of parking prioritises private vehicle owners over the broader community, which is not the intention of this strategy. Rather the wording should reflect that there are competing needs, each with their costs and benefits and they should be given equal weighting.

Immediate actions, page 24: Add 
Develop a pipeline of new cycleways that provide alternative ways of getting around.

Cycleways reduce the demand for parking, and so should form part of the parking strategy. This work is consistent with the Cycling Strategy and Action Plan so represents no additional burden for council.

Medium term actions, page 25: Replace
Subject to a parking study, repurpose some public domain parking space to create space for other uses such as pedestrian, bike and bus priority, landscaping, outdoor dining and affordable housing
With
Repurpose some public domain parking space to create space for other uses such as pedestrian, bike and bus priority, landscaping, outdoor dining and affordable housing, while balancing parking needs where there is a genuine need

Repurposing space for improved community benefit should not be predicated on parking impacts, rather the parking needs should be considered equally and fairly against other community benefits.

Medium term actions page 25: Replace
Price permit parking schemes to discourage multiple vehicle ownership, discourage excessively large vehicles and generate funds for transport and streetscape improvements 
With
Price permit parking schemes to discourage multiple vehicle ownership, discourage excessively large vehicles and generate funds for public and active transport, and streetscape improvements 

​We should only fund improvements to public and active transport, as they are the realistic alternatives to driving.

The following table details changes we’d like to see to the objectives themselves

Tom Watson - Secretary
Sander Ottes - Committee Member

We strongly support this project. A separated two-way bike path connecting Iron Cove to Rozelle Parklands is exactly the kind of infrastructure Inner West needs; it fills a major gap in the cycling network. We thank Council for progressing this and for adopting previous community feedback.
We welcome the excellent design features that have been incorporated into the concept design, especially:

• Dedicated cycleway, separated from traffic.
• Removal of the slip lane at Mary Street.
• Kerb extensions into side streets and Lilyfield Rd, which visually narrow the space, calm traffic, and reduce turning vehicle speeds.
• Bike storage boxes at Mary Street.
• Cycleway bend-out and raised priority crossing at Catherine Street.
• A crossing over Lilyfield Road at Catherine Street for cyclists using Grove Street.
• PS-2 bike symbols and Bikes May Use Full Lane signs on the vehicle travel lanes for the downhill sections, which encourages faster riders to use the road, thereby leaving the cycleway for less confident or newer riders.

If possible, we also propose and encourage a number of improvements for consideration in the detailed design phase. They are numbered below:

1. Path width on steep western sectionTo reduce safety concerns in the steep western section of the path (8% gradient), please widen the cycleway from 2.6m to the maximum width possible. A 3m wide cycleway can be achieved by narrowing the parking lanes to 2m (on the north they’re 2.1m wide and on the south side, they’re wider than necessary, at 2.4m).
TfNSW’s Cycleway Design Toolbox recommends even wider cycleways. For an even safer design, please consider removing the small amount of parking on the south side of Lilyfield Rd on this section, and shifting the centre line south, to enable an even wider cycleway on this steep strip. The project has a large net increase in parking, and effectively relocating some bays from the western side of Lilyfield Road to the eastern end is justifiable.
However, if these are not possible, we still strongly support the two-way design. Many riders, especially those who would never choose to ride on a busy road regardless of conditions, need protection in both directions. A one-way uphill solution would exclude exactly the people this infrastructure is meant to serve.

2. Balmain Road connectionsBalmain Road north of Lilyfield Road is a major walking route to school, with high pedestrian activity particularly around the childcare centre and preschool north of Eric Street. The western side of Balmain Road at the Lilyfield Road crossing is already a dangerous pinch point, with buses passing a narrow footpath at close range. We ask Council to widen the western footpath as an immediate improvement. When the time comes to extend cycling infrastructure along this corridor, a separated cycleway will be needed to keep cyclists and pedestrians safe.

On the bridge over City West Link: the eastern footpath is effectively unusable, as people cannot cross City West Link on the eastern side and are forced into a triple crossing. We suggest that Council consider removing the eastern footpath and using that space to widen the western side, a better outcome for both pedestrians and a future cycleway.

3. Maliyawul Street opening widthWe ask Council to narrow the Maliyawul Street opening to Lilyfield Road from 10.6 m to approximately 7 m, consistent with other side streets along the route. The current width encourages fast entry by larger vehicles (including limousines and boat trailers) into a stretch with high pedestrian and cyclist activity adjacent to the Le Montage car park and the Bay Run shared path. Narrowing the opening would reduce vehicle speeds and improve safety for cyclists exiting Maliyawul Street toward Canal Road under the City West Link. Drivers of long vehicles being forced to give way to each other is a good way to further calm traffic at this potential conflict point.

4. Additional crossing & cycleway entry opportunitiesWe encourage openings to enable cycleway access from side streets, and support any additional crossing opportunities along and across Lilyfield Road, for example:

• A raised pedestrian and cyclist priority crossing across Rayner Street, with additional traffic calming along this rat-run route.
• A crossing over Lilyfield Road between Grove and Ryan Streets.
• A crossing at Grove Street/Catherine Street to enable easier cycleway access from Grove Street, calm traffic, and reduce pedestrian crossing distances.

5. Additional shared pathsPlease consider the following additional shared paths where feasible:

• Northern side of Lilyfield Rd, between Lamb Street to Cecily Street.
• Easton Park crossing to Denison Street and past the amenities block to Burt Street.

6. Driveway treatmentWe ask Council to consider alternatives to driveway dips for the cycleway (like Livingstone Rd). Most other councils use half-kerb-height cycleways with two laybacks (red arrows, right), which maintain a flat cycleway and improve the riding experience.

7. Catherine Street contraflowWe would support a scope increase to include improvements to the Catherine Street bike lane and contraflow path, which would improve access to the cycleway from the south.

8. Crossing detection: optical sensors over push buttonsPlease trial optical bike sensors at crossings, or at minimum confirm that push buttons are accessible to cargo bikes carrying children. Bikes with front buckets, increasingly popular with parents, require riders to dismount to press buttons, deterring less confident riders. Optical or in-road sensors are the better long-term solution.

9. Speed limit reductionWe ask Council to consider a reduced speed limit on Lilyfield Road, particularly west of Mary Street on the downhill approach to Hawthorne Canal. A 40 km/h limit would be an appropriate intermediate step; 30 km/h should be the goal between Gordon Street and Ryan Street, given proximity to parklands and limited crossing opportunities.

​Thank you for your consideration. Implementing these suggestions will also better align this project with the Design of Roads and Streets Manual, thus, improving the chances of a successful grant application.

Bike Marrickville is incredibly pleased to see Council taking proactive measures to improve rider safety and encourage active transport in the area. We commend Inner West Council for remaining committed to its goals in the Community Strategic Plan, Integrated Transport Strategy, and Cycling Strategy.

We would welcome the opportunity to discuss our submission with Council staff.

Yours sincerely,

Sander Ottes - Committee Member
Ellis Bou-Harb - President

Change is coming to the Inner West. Thirty thousand new dwellings are on the way. Without a real transport plan, backed by investment, we risk locking in congestion and car dependence for decades. But we can choose another path: a city built around people, not cars.
We believe the Inner West can be Amsterdam on the Cooks River or Copenhagen by the Bay. Our neighbourhoods already have the bones of a world-class cycling city: wide, quiet streets; green corridors; high streets within a 10-minute cycle or walk; and a culture of social justice and activism. What we're missing is connectedness, everyday utility, sustained funding and the political will to make the way we move around the Inner West better.
Cities like Amsterdam and Copenhagen — and in Sydney, even our neighbouring City of Sydney council — show what happens when population growth is matched with serious investment in safe, separated cycling and walkable neighbourhoods. As Council establishes a $500 million infrastructure fund, this is the moment to embed walking and cycling as core community infrastructure; not an optional extra.
Our vision is an Inner West where walking and cycling are the top choice for short trips. Where every child can ride safely to school, parents feel confident riding with their kids, and local shops thrive on vibrant, walkable high streets. A place where freedom doesn't mean owning a car, but being able to move easily, safely and joyfully; and where, on the days you do need to drive, streets are calmer, uncongested and more pleasant for everyone.
This submission sets out how the Building Our Community Developer Contributions Plan can help deliver on this future.
It is grounded in community mapping undertaken by Bike Marrickville and cross-referenced with Council's adopted strategies, including the Blue-Green Grid, the Cycling Strategy and housing investigation areas under Our Fairer Future. It sets out the priority routes required to make cycling safe, practical and appealing for everyday trips.
We would welcome the opportunity to brief council staff further on the long, and short-term cycling improvements needed to enable more choice of movement across our Inner West.

In December 2025, Bike Marrickville hosted a workshop. Maps of the Inner West local government area were printed out and participants asked to draw on them with coloured markers to highlight roads and areas where improvements could be made.
Following the workshop, the markings were digitised into a spreadsheet where they were cross-referenced with the existing cycle network, council strategies (namely the Cycling Strategy, the Blue-Green Grid and Our Fairer Future), nearby amenities or attractors, local/state/regional roads and bus routes.
Each item was then ranked with achievability and impact scores: achievability was determined by road types (higher on local roads, lower on state/regional roads) and impact by the presence in, or relevance to council's strategies.
Additionally the items were sorted into two categories: "Routes for investigation" and "Small improvements". Each of the items selected below include a larger route for future, detailed investigation and a number of small improvements that could be delivered sooner, providing benefit immediately.
Items were selected for inclusion below if they:

• Had higher achievability and impact scores
• Would service a housing investigation area from Our Fairer Future, the Bays West metro precinct, or the Parramatta Road upzonings.

Alongside the routes for investigation outlined below, all existing cycleway projects should have design and construction funded via the developer contributions plan, including:

• Marrickville Rd East Cycleway
• Lilyfield Rd Cycleway
• Iron Cove Creek Masterplan delivery
• Pyrmont Bridge Rd cycleway
• Robert St, Rozelle cycleway
• Sydenham Road Strategy & Cycleway

This submission proposes and justifies new infrastructure projects to support housing uplift, specifically:

• Addison Road Cycleway, Marrickville
• Beach & Pine Street Cycleway, Dulwich Hill
• Sydney Steel Road & Edinburgh Rd Cycleway, Marrickville
• Hercules Street Cycleway, Dulwich Hill
• Loftus Street Quietway, Ashfield
• Bland Street Quietway, Ashfield
• Livingstone Street Cycleway southern extension
• Johnston Street Cycleway, Annandale
• Mallet St, Booth/Moore St, Allen St Cycleway in Leichhardt/Annandale/Camperdown.

We also strongly support other campaigns for:

1. A new Marrickville Town Square at the corner of Calvert Street and Illawarra Road.
2. Pocket parks/road closures on Illawarra Road, between Marrickville Rd and Sydenham Rd, and another between Sydenham Rd and Addison Rd.
3. Cooks River path lighting, widening, and separation of pedestrians and cyclists. Plus, connections to the path, and collaboration with other councils along the route to ensure consistency in infrastructure styles delivered.
4. Delivery of the Iron Cove Creek path ("CreekWay" to keep the GreenWay and MetroWay theme?)
5. Balmain Road cycleway, in front of Callan Park.

Addison Road Cycleway, Marrickville

• Link 9 of the Blue-Green Grid
• Features in Inner West Council's Cycling Strategy
• In Council's Housing Investigation Area 2 adjacent to the Addison Road sub-precinct
• Connects to an existing cycling route along Livingstone Rd
• Council resolved to consult on an Addison Rd Cycleway at the September 2024 council meeting
• Provides connection to amenities including the Marrickville Metro, Wilkins Primary School, Newington College, the Addison Road Community Organisation and Henson Oval

Short-term improvements

• Replace pedestrian refuge island between John St and Park Rd with a combined pedestrian/cycle wombat crossing to improve access to Wilkins Public school and connect quiet streets either side of Addison Rd
• Implement shared path from the end of the Livingstone Rd cycleway to Addison Rd on the western side of Livingstone Rd until the separated cycleway can be extended
• A modal filter on Illawarra Rd between Chapel St and Woodland St to improve cycling conditions on quiet side streets and access to Addison Rd Community Centre
• Replacing the slip lane at the Eastern end of Addison Rd with widened footpaths
• Lower speed limits to 30 km/h to make on-road cycling safer

Sydenham Road Cycleway, Marrickville

• Link 1 of the Blue-Green Grid
• Features in the Cycling Strategy
• Connects the Marrickville Local Centre sub-precinct of the Housing Investigation Area 1A to the Sydenham Metro station
• Connects new high density developments at Wicks Park and the Timberyards to the Sydenham Metro station
• The subject of an existing Inner West Council community engagement, i.e. "Sydenham Road Strategy"
• Provides access to amenities including part of the Inner West Ale Trail, Marrickville Bowling Club and the Sydenham Metro station

Short-term improvements

• Additional combined cycle/pedestrian wombat on Sydenham Rd crossings. For example at Barclay St and Meeks Rd to connect to Marrickville Rd East
• Upgraded intersection at Fitzroy St
• Shared path on both sides of Sydenham Rd until a separated cycleway can be implemented
• Combined pedestrian/cycle crossing on Fitzroy St between Chapel St and Lillian Fowler Pl to improve a parallel, quiet street route
• Lower speed limits to 30 km/h to make on-road cycling safer

Dulwich Hill Village to Livingstone Road (Beach & Pine Street Cycleway)

• Parts of links 19 and 54 of the Blue-Green Grid
• Features in the Cycling Strategy
• Connects the Dulwich Hill Village sub-precinct of Housing Investigation Area 1 to the existing Livingstone Rd cycleway
• Entirely on Local Roads and doesn't impact bus routes
• Provides access to Dulwich Hill high street retail, the Greenway, Dulwich Hill Public and Dulwich Hill High along with better access to Marrickville Town Centre

Short-term improvements

• Combined pedestrian/cycle wombat crossing on Wardell St between Beach Rd and Pine St with a short separated cycleway to provide priority crossing for bikes and pedestrians
• Traffic calming at the bend in Hollands Ave so drivers are more aware of contraflow cyclists

Livingstone Rd Cycleway Southern Extension(see Addison Road section above for Northern Extension)

• Link 68 of the Blue-Green Grid
• Part of the Housing Investigation Area 1A
• Connects Marrickville West Primary School to the Livingstone Rd cycleway
• Entirely on local roads
• Connects the Livingstone Rd cycleway to Local Route 18, the existing bike route from Dulwich Hill Station to Marrickville Station

Short-term improvements

• Shared path on the Western side of Livingstone Rd until separated cycleway can be extended

These routes represent the minimum infrastructure required to achieve Council's "Going Places" (Integrated Transport Strategy) mode-shift targets while supporting unprecedented housing growth. Council's own Traffic and Transport Needs Study acknowledges that safe cycling infrastructure is 'disconnected and disjointed'; these nine routes directly address the gaps Council has already identified.
The window to shape transport behavior is now. Thousands of new residents arriving in housing investigation areas will make transport decisions based on available infrastructure. If cycling feels unsafe because these routes don't exist, they will buy cars. Once that investment is made and the habit established, mode shift becomes exponentially harder.
Council's Climate and Renewables Strategy commits to fostering zero emissions mobility. These routes are the physical infrastructure making those commitments real. The policy framework is in place. The population is ready. The growth is coming. What's needed is infrastructure making cycling safe, practical, and appealing for the 'interested but concerned' majority who would cycle for transport if it felt safe.
We request Council commit to delivering these routes through the Developer Contributions Plan, with design commencing immediately and construction beginning as soon as possible.

Sincerely, the Bike Marrickville committee:
​Tom Watson – Secretary
Estelle Grech – Vice President
Natalie Ross – Treasurer
Ellis Bou-Harb – President
Sander Ottes
Mariska Marnane
John Caley
Fiona Campbell
John McNeil
Ed Steane
Patrick O'Meara
Tamsyn Glenn
Jason L'Ecuyer